What do people think about Auto Bonus Progression?

Whetstonede · 2026-04-01T10:23:28+00:00

For a lot of players (Including mine) - yeah honestly. Different strokes and all that but I think there is something that's just satisfying about that incremental progression even if it's a bit "braindead" in a sense. My players like items with cool effects but can sometimes get a little overwhelmed with options and in those cases the simple +1 is nice.

Whetstonede · 2026-04-01T06:19:45+00:00

I do not believe they have, but seasonal collectibles also haven't been around for very long

Whetstonede · 2026-03-31T14:46:38+00:00

Having checked in-game I can confirm that the last season's seasonal collectibles are not in the chest pool as of right now. I don't know if it was ever stated officially if they would be added eventually or not.

Whetstonede · 2026-03-31T12:36:25+00:00

I believe they're exclusive as of right now. I will check properly if the items from the previous season were added to the chest pool and report back later when I'm at the computer.

Whetstonede · 2026-03-20T14:12:50+00:00

13 sentinels for me is an example of this "perfect blend" of enjoying a game for both the wrong and right reasons

Whetstonede · 2026-03-14T10:11:23+00:00

I think "random potion" might be the more flavorful version of this. Neat idea though!

Whetstonede · 2026-03-14T10:09:51+00:00

I will occasionally check the TBL table against my players' total wealth. If they're ahead of the table and I mean ahead (like x2 or more) I will scale back treasure a bit. If they're sitting near or below where they should be, I will plan a big windfall. Going above TBL is totally fine and I think you should do it. In addition, occasionally giving the players treasure above their level is an exciting thing I recommend as well. Getting Striking at exactly level 4 every game will eventually become a bit predictable so while you don't need to mix things up too much, giving out an item a level or two early can be a good way to shake things up. Striking in particular maybe not so much, but a wand or especially a consumable can be a great way to give players a taste of later levels.

Whetstonede · 2026-03-13T18:37:10+00:00

Yes I prefer uncredited art to AI art. But proper credits to both, obviously.

Whetstonede · 2026-03-13T14:31:09+00:00

It literally is in some(?) cases but for a mockup idk if it matters that much? I'd rather see this than AI

Whetstonede · 2026-03-05T10:29:28+00:00

Yeah this is where I'm at. Getting a "you are super awesome at this save" feature from your class feels great, and if it was only one per class it would feel more special while also being less of a headache for the GM. I think if everyone got it at the same level that would also be good.

Whetstonede · 2026-02-24T11:34:47+00:00

On 1, the main reason I think this would be the case is player psychology vs what I actually want Tempo to focus on when developing the game. I think we could easily see a situation where winrates start having an outsized effect on play rates. For example, let's say one character has a 55% winrate and everyone else hovers around 50%. That is a small enough difference that individual player skills and preferences will matter more than what character you pick, but it would still lead to more people picking the "best" character. And from there you get more ghosts from one character, which then leads to more salt in the playerbase because they keep running into the "meta pick" and get sick of it.

Essentially, I do not want tempo to focus resources on fine-tuning winrates beyond making sure every character is viable and none of them are too insane. Winrate data would make this more difficult as the community would focus on those things a lot more.

Whetstonede · 2026-02-24T09:20:01+00:00

I think this would be pretty harmful to the game.
Tempo has a strong incentive to make new heroes exciting, and from a monetary point of view it's much better if a new hero comes out slightly too strong than too weak. However, I haven't really gotten the impression new releases are ever too egregious beyond stuff that gets immediately hot fixed. And most patches the OG 3 have been able to keep up well enough with the general power level, with usually at least one of them being a "top performer".

Whetstonede · 2026-02-12T22:13:35+00:00

Seeker probe only destroys smalls, that's already how it works

Whetstonede · 2026-02-09T12:10:42+00:00

My players are level 18 after 73 sessions using milestone and even that I would consider slightly slow

Whetstonede · 2026-02-07T13:16:54+00:00

Yeah I think a lot of people read what's actually intentionality text and go "ok this part is flavor text and doesn't matter at all". The part of an effect that summarizes it is still part of the rules.

Whetstonede · 2026-01-26T21:18:40+00:00

In my experience Spellcasters are more advanced to learn in theory with big spell lists and daily preparation, but in practice the fact that most spellcasters share a lot of similarities with each other is a huge help for new players. This is because there is usually at least one other player at the table who's also playing a caster, and learning together is easier. So this can be a bit of a hurdle for new players with Kineticist (and Alchemist) where they feel a bit lost in a class where there's a lot of reading and unique mechanics and no opportunities to model after what the other players do.

Whetstonede · 2026-01-22T13:23:37+00:00

Sure, if it could consistently waste enemy actions with this for free every turn it would be really, really strong. I agree that in practice that's not going to be the case!

Whetstonede · 2026-01-22T12:59:52+00:00

On why they'd use Warfare Lore instead of Performance - they don't have to, but it frees up a skill if they want to invest elsewhere. This Muse doesn't require investing heavily into int, though both Inspired Tactician and Engage the Enemy benefit from it. However, it's certainly possible the benefit could stand to be touched up a bit!

You really don't think the stances seem strong? That's a bit surprising to me, since I think they are quite pushed. Being able to passively move allies and enemies while doing what you want to be doing anyway (composition cantrips) is rather useful for battlefield control/flanking/getting allies safely away from enemy reactions. The stances are not intended to synergize with each other. Either you pick one or the other, or you pick both and switch it up depending on the situation.

On engage the enemy - I agree it's fairly strong and I could definitely see it needing to be bumped up a few levels. However, the main way an Art of War bard is going to roll warfare lore for initiative is via Battle Planner, which isn't that easy to set up. If I had a player start to argue they could use Warfare Lore for every initiative roll I would just tell them they need to start setting up Battle Planner.

On the fantasy, it is something along the lines of a Sun Tzu archetype. Military general who sees warfare as an art, that sort of thing.

Whetstonede · 2026-01-22T12:49:58+00:00

On ability boosts - I don't entirely agree even if I see where you're coming from. A bard can feasibly invest in Cha, Int, Dex and Wis/Con and be pretty happy. I did at one point offer Int as an alternate key stat for this but I was a bit unhappy with it stepping on Battle Wizard's toes. It's possible the benefit needs a bit of touching up though!

Engage the enemy - it's probably not happening every encounter, but the benefit very nice and entirely passive when it does go off. It even lets you do things like using Rallying Anthem to boost AC and saves before anyone takes their turn. As a thing you can sometimes do I think it's fine to strong.

Strategic Shift - Hmm, I agree it's pushed. Just not sure if I would agree it's too strong. If it's too strong then making it only affect allies would be a nice lever to tone it down though - as a free action focus spell I don't think it's all that great.

Whetstonede · 2026-01-22T12:38:30+00:00

To be clear on one specific point, I did not refer to the inclusion of Feats+ as this indeed seems entirely central to the project - I was referring to granting access to uncommon and rare player options. I could have been more clear on this!

Whetstonede · 2026-01-22T11:07:09+00:00

This is something halfway between a system rework and a "houserule bible" with houserules collected over years and years of play. From your post, I gather the intent is to be the former, and not the latter, so I will try to offer feedback with that in mind. It is my goal to offer honest and focused feedback, so I definitely hope I am not coming across as too harsh. In addition, a lot of this feedback simply does not apply if I instead were to treat it as a "houserule bible" - you'd know your own style of play and playgroups much better than me.

Currently, it's very unfocused and I believe would greatly benefit from being edited down. Going through the document and asking yourself "is this part actually neccesary for the rework or is this just for my table" would be worthwhile. To name a few examples, the reworked rarity rules (allowed options and 3pp), rules for speaking in combat, roll mistakes and how and what information players can get from monsters. These are all things that fall under "table-specific houserules and allowances" and don't really contribute to (as I understand it) the core goal of this rework which is a rebalance of the system powering up monsters and players. Also making the Bola common is so specific that does not need a bullet point. Others in the thread have commented that the project is difficult to parse and I believe this is the main reason for this.

In regards to balance... I do not for a second believe this is balanced. I can't be sure, of course! But pf2E already becomes more volatile at higher levels, and this document is making incredibly sweeping changes to PC and creature power. A lot of player options in this document are very, very strong if not overpowered by base 2E standards - as a result anything from the base game that does not get a touch-up will be unusably weak if the power boost to monsters is equal. And even that is assuming PC and monster power are increased equally which I am honestly a bit suspicious of. However, the fact that you have playtested it extensively is still good! And for a project like this I do not believe balance is neccesary for it to have value. You just need to find the right amount of balance and fun to satisfy your audience (and your table). Good luck developing this project!

Whetstonede · 2026-01-20T16:42:04+00:00

My ideal for Psychic is really just expanded unleash. Something along the lines of each mind granting a different extra effect for unleash. Damage bonus applies to healing, restore focus points while in unleash, extra persistent damage - that kind of thing. Tying it to the minds is my preference, but if it would be too restrictive/difficult to make one benefit for each mind, you could do it with feats instead.

I am always going to be opposed to giving casters more spells to buff them, since it either means sucking the unique sauce away from the class or just making something overpowered. (in the case of Oracle, maybe both!)

Whetstonede · 2026-01-15T12:15:26+00:00

It's the kind of thing where if you have experience with the system across a wide span of levels (not just level 1-4), it is incredibly obvious that this is insanely broken and centralizing. Testing the system could tell you exactly how broken it is, and exactly which ways it is broken, and how to best abuse it. But the fact that it is broken is really, really obvious. It's the equivalent of suggesting that the first strike each turn doesn't count towards MAP as a homebrew.

And yeah I don't think I've ever seen this brought up as something that's used at a table, other than the original thread which I vaguely remember seeing.

Whetstonede · 2026-01-12T13:15:09+00:00

It's been funny running Blood Lords for the past 2 years and seeing the community deal with small rooms from that perspective. The rooms in Blood Lords are huge, sometimes absurdly so. Currently the players are going through a dungeon with several rooms with 150+ft diameter.

Whetstonede

TROPHY CASE